Tenure must go. And so must Professor’s unions. If you don’t agree with me then perhaps you have yet to familiarize yourself with the case of Professor Edward Larkin. This tenured psychopath will keep his job despite exposing himself in public in front of a 17-year old girl and her mother.
The University of New Hampshire (UNH) did the right thing when they tried to fire him. But then the Professor’s union got involved. And that led to arbitration. The arbitrator’s decision was based on a single line in the contract with the UNH Professor’s union, which says a professor has to show “moral delinquencies of a grave nature” to be fired.
The arbitrator found Larkin’s behavior didn’t meet the standard of grave moral delinquency. That bears repeating: An arbitrator determined that pulling your penis out in front of a teenage girl and her mother in a public place is not a “moral delinquenc(y) of a grave nature.”
The union decried the decision. I’m just kidding. They actually applauded the decision. Union President Deanna Wood defended the decision by noting that Larkin was convicted of a misdemeanor and it was a first offense. She fails to understand that felonious conduct is often pled down to a misdemeanor during plea negotiations. None of that serves to mitigate the “grave moral deficiency” of pulling your penis out in front of minors. One wonders whether Wood would defend Larkin if he had shown her his wood. One also wonders whether she has a teenage daughter.
“If you use state law as a benchmark this was not moral deficiency of a grave order,” Wood said to a local TV station. I’m not sure what that means. There are felonies. There are misdemeanors. But, technically, there are no “grave” offensives – at least the New Hampshire Criminal Code doesn’t use that language.
But most normal people - not academic unionists defending the indefensible – realize that pulling out your penis in public is a grave moral offense. If someone did that in the presence of my daughter, he would be in grave danger of having his penis shot off with a 240-grain hollow-point. Then, the whole question of re-instatement would be settled.
But, alas, after suspension without pay, Lurking Larkin has been reinstated. And everything is okay, according to some fellow unionists. Why? It’s because he has undergone psychiatric treatment. But this is not a psychiatric issue. This is a moral issue. And that is why most university professors are in such a bad position to offer sound judgment on the case.
Poll: Only Three Percent of Americans Consider Immigration "Most Important" Problem | Christine Rousselle